Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 23 Jun 2012 (Saturday) 07:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Disturbing trend in high schools

 
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:23 |  #571

kcbrown wrote in post #14725832 (external link)
Actually, the laws of logic are a combination of axioms and observation.

In particular, cause and effect is foundational to logic, but the validity of a cause and effect model has been observed.


If you are arguing merely that we make use of some axioms in science, then you have my full agreement: it does make use of some axioms. But science attempts to minimize those.

Where does the logical law of non-contradiction come from? ;-)a


"I don't like the direction this thread is going..." (LightRules)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,333 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5774
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:25 |  #572

This thread is beyond ridiculous and a clear reason why we may never get image theft under control because so many try and justify theft and its sad indeed because if creatives can't support what they all create its not a good sign for the future. SO keep arguing that well if your in a trench and if the enemy has bread and his mother backed it but you're real hunger blah blah blah if you take someones work you're a thief and we should all be together on that issue because at some time we may all be impacted by it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:26 |  #573

alt4852 wrote in post #14725782 (external link)
I'm saying that people's perceptions are what creates that sense of right and wrong. Without people, there is no morality. It is the name we place on our own inherent sympathy/empathy combined with societal expectations.

Lets just take your argument to its logical conclusion.

If two people have different perceptions on an issue, how can right or wrong exist, if they both get to define right or wrong?


"Can't list equipment, wife checks here to see what I have bought lately" (calicokat)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:29 |  #574

alt4852 wrote in post #14725809 (external link)
The human condition is an experience. You live your life and grow to understand through comparison from other experiences what you like and don't like; what is good and what is bad. You base these qualitative perceptions on your other experiences.

So you define what is good and bad through experience.

So then, what if someone else disagrees and contradicts you.

How does good and bad exist in that scenario?


You'll be late for everything because the light was right and the action was good (magoosmc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:29 |  #575

mtimber wrote in post #14725840 (external link)
By what authority do you define the above as such?

What says I need an authority for such a definition? You asked for a definition and I gave you one.

That you ask for an authority means you presume the truth of your own argument. You presume the existence of an authority and of its use.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alt4852
Goldmember
Avatar
3,419 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:29 |  #576

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14725857 (external link)
This thread is beyond ridiculous and a clear reason why we may never get image theft under control because so many try and justify theft and its sad indeed because if creatives can't support what they all create its not a good sign for the future. SO keep arguing that well if your in a trench and if the enemy has bread and his mother backed it but you're real hunger blah blah blah if you take someones work you're a thief and we should all be together on that issue because at some time we may all be impacted by it.

Ignore all of this philosophical-laden discussion. I've only participated to see if he was getting to a point that tied it into the original discussion and it clearly is not getting there. However, this I believe sums up everything that I've been trying to say from the start. It's not about justifying theft, and it saddens me to see you say that again as it's evident that you still refuse to read:

AntonLargiader wrote in post #14724661 (external link)
The way I read it, the point is that the existing means of dealing with the problem aren't working. So you can label it whatever you want, and stay on your high moral horse, but that isn't fixing the problem. Copyright infringment is wrong, so what? It's happening. That's the point.

The problem is widespread because the perpetrators don't care. You will have VERY limited success convincing them to care. Rapid changes in technology have shifted values powerfully.

This thread is about a realistic response to the current situation, not a head-in-the-sand insistence that the whole world should clean up its act and abide by rules that ... well, really have never been followed in the first place. Civilization has been fighting petty crime since its inception. Insisting that crime is wrong doesn't actually accomplish anything.

Anton pretty much summarized everything that I've been trying to say. If you don't understand this, then there's really nothing I can do.


5D4 | Z21 | 35L2 | 50L | 85L2 | 135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:30 |  #577

mtimber wrote in post #14725844 (external link)
Where does the logical law of non-contradiction come from? ;-)a

From the observation that the world behaves in a reasonably consistent manner.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:31 |  #578

alt4852 wrote in post #14725822 (external link)
Bear with me, because I'm curious how you answer this:

Are you a moral person?

Followup question: Why?


I am restricted in the subjects I can discuss due to board policy.

So my personal convictions and my character are not up for discussion, due to these factors. :-)


"I don't like the direction this thread is going..." (LightRules)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:33 |  #579

kcbrown wrote in post #14725871 (external link)
What says I need an authority for such a definition? You asked for a definition and I gave you one.

That you ask for an authority means you presume the truth of your own argument. You presume the existence of an authority and of its use.

By defining right or wrong, you have to appeal to some standard, some argument, in this case your own experience.

But if someone elses experiences defines right or wrong differently, then how can right or wrong exist as a moral concept?

It cannot.

So it is illogical to use the concept of subjective morality to define moral standards, because the concept by nature and logic is self refuting...


"I have applied for jobs at National Geographic, Sports Illustrated and Playboy. The phone should start ringing any minute now" (Curtis N)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:34 |  #580

kcbrown wrote in post #14725875 (external link)
From the observation that the world behaves in a reasonably consistent manner.

And if the world wasn't observed would the law of non-contradiction still exist?


"Can't list equipment, wife checks here to see what I have bought lately" (calicokat)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:35 |  #581

mtimber wrote in post #14725862 (external link)
Lets just take your argument to its logical conclusion.

If two people have different perceptions on an issue, how can right or wrong exist, if they both get to define right or wrong?

Through consensus.

Get a large enough group of people together, and you'll generally get substantial agreement amongst them about right and wrong.

That's not an accident. People exist in the real world and have real needs. It's not an accident that right and wrong generally follow those things which are needed for the survival of the group that defines right and wrong.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:35 |  #582

kcbrown wrote in post #14725871 (external link)
That you ask for an authority means you presume the truth of your own argument. You presume the existence of an authority and of its use.

I deduce the authority.

Like I said, without absolute moral standards, you could not even define the concept of morality.


"I have applied for jobs at National Geographic, Sports Illustrated and Playboy. The phone should start ringing any minute now" (Curtis N)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,011 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Cambs, UK
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:40 |  #583

kcbrown wrote in post #14725892 (external link)
Through consensus.

Get a large enough group of people together, and you'll generally get substantial agreement amongst them about right and wrong.

That's not an accident. People exist in the real world and have real needs. It's not an accident that right and wrong generally follow those things which are needed for the survival of the group that defines right and wrong.

So a group of cannibals on a small island that are hungry and believe they gain the spiritual strength when eating their smaller group of neighbours on the other island, are according to your definition, "right"...

Therefore, eating your neighbours baby is morally correct?

Because enough people agreed on it, therefore it is a good idea...


That is the logical conclusion of your argument, do you realise that?


You'll be late for everything because the light was right and the action was good (magoosmc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,333 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5774
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:43 |  #584

I read very well thank you and no matter how you slice it and dice it if you take something thats not yours, you are a thief.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 16, 2012 17:44 |  #585

mtimber wrote in post #14725893 (external link)
I deduce the authority.

Deduction requires that you have something to deduce from.

From what do you deduce the authority?

Like I said, without absolute moral standards, you could not even define the concept of morality.

This is an assertion you continue to make, but you have not proven it. I've given a counterexample which alone should constitute an existence proof that shows this assertion to be false.

To wit: I have defined "good" and "bad" without reference to an external authority. Since morality is merely the evaluation of actions against the concepts of "good" and "bad", it is sufficient to have definitions in hand for "good" and "bad in order to "define the concept" of morality.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

54,644 views & 0 likes for this thread
Disturbing trend in high schools
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is lf_alex
923 guests, 340 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.